Patient preferences and cost-benefit of hypertension and hyperlipidemia collaborative management model between pharmacies and primary care in Portugal: A discrete choice experiment alongside a trial (USFarmácia®)

Costa, Suzete and Guerreiro, José and Teixeira, Inês and Helling, Dennis K. and Mateus, Céu and Pereira, João (2023) Patient preferences and cost-benefit of hypertension and hyperlipidemia collaborative management model between pharmacies and primary care in Portugal: A discrete choice experiment alongside a trial (USFarmácia®). PLoS One, 18 (10): e0292308. e0292308. ISSN 1932-6203

Abstract

Background: Little is known about patient preferences and the value of pharmacy-collaborative disease management with primary care using technology-driven interprofessional communication under real-world conditions. Discrete Choice Experiments (DCEs) are useful for quantifying preferences for non-market services. Objectives: 1) To explore variation in patient preferences and estimate willingness-to-accept annual cost to the National Health Service (NHS) for attributes of a collaborative intervention trial between pharmacies and primary care using a trial exit DCE interview; 2) to incorporate a DCE into an economic evaluation using cost-benefit analysis (CBA). Methods: We performed a DCE telephone interview with a sample of hypertension and hyperlipidemia trial patients 12 months after trial onset. We used five attributes (levels): waiting time to get urgent/not urgent medical appointment (7 days/45 days; 48 hrs./30 days; same day/15 days), model of pharmacy intervention (5-min. counter basic check; 15-min. office every 3 months for BP and medication review of selected medicines; 30-min. office every 6 months for comprehensive measurements and medication review of all medicines), integration with primary care (weak; partial; full), chance of having a stroke in 5 years (same; slightly lower; much lower), and annual cost to the NHS (0€; 30€; 51€; 76€). We used an experimental orthogonal fractional factorial design. Data were analyzed using conditional logit. We subtracted the estimated annual incremental trial costs from the mean WTA (Net Benefit) for CBA. Results: A total of 122 patients completed the survey. Waiting time to get medical appointment—on the same day (urgent) and within 15 days (non-urgent)—was the most important attribute, followed by 30-minute pharmacy intervention in private office every 6 months for point-of-care measurements and medication review of all medicines, and full integration with primary care. The cost attribute was not significant. Intervention patients were willing to accept the NHS annual cost of €877 for their preferred scenario. The annual net benefit per patient is €788.20 and represents the monetary value of patients’ welfare surplus for this model. Conclusions: This study is the first conducted in Portugal alongside a pharmacy collaborative trial, incorporating DCE into CBA. The findings can be used to guide the design of pharmacy collaborative interventions with primary care with the potential for reimbursement for uncontrolled or at-risk chronic disease patients informed by patient preferences. Future DCE studies conducted in community pharmacy may provide additional contributions. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials (ISRCTN): ISRCTN13410498, retrospectively registered on 12 December 2018.